The Masters

It's very typical. Far more people want to watch Tiger Woods than Trevor Immelman, and ESPN is going to pander to their interests.

 

Immelman up 4 with 8 holes to play. Its his tournament to lose at this point. Tiger currently 5 back, everybody in the final groups struggling to even get par today.

 

All of a sudden Immelman's making this interesting. Only up 3 with 2 to play.

 

Still up 3 on Tiger with only the 18th to play... all he has to do is be smart and its in the bag.

Tiger notably didn't play well for him... and he'll still finish in second, barring a Snedeker eagle or a complete Immelman breakdown. Not bad.

EDIT: And Immelman holds on to win at -8. I take credit for this: Yeah, the Masters' Sunday pin placements are cruel. I'm thinking it'll be somewhere around -8 or so.

 

Congratulations to Immelman on a fine tournament victory. He played very well through the first three days, and did enough today to win.

I feel badly for Tiger. It's got to be rough to post one of the best scores of the day (and all with only one exceptional putt), and still finish three off the pace. Many will complain about his inability to capitalize on today's opportunities, but second at the Masters isn't exactly pedestrian.

But boy, oh, boy! Immelman may have won the jacket, but Augusta won the day. That course was positively brutal. That poor Snedeker; he behaved with real class, I think.

 

If Tiger hadn't missed that birdie on the 13th, I doubt he would have made a bogie on the next hole and might have birdied 15 as well. What a difference that would have made for Tiger. Still, congrats to Immelman on a great victory. If only he could have made that birdie on the last hole then my prediction of a -9 winning score would have been spot on. Oh well...

 

Yeah, Tiger just couldn't hit a putt today, and that hurt him. He left at least four strokes on the green, and when you consder Immelman won by three...this could have been real tight.

 

I was traveling for business all weekend and/or in business, so I missed the entire tournament!

But can we now never again talk about someone winning a Grand Slam until they've won at least one (or two or three, preferably) majors that year?

 

But can we now never again talk about someone winning a Grand Slam until they've won at least one (or two or three, preferably) majors that year?

I agree wholeheartedly. Though I would say at least two.

I was actually wondering whether the media and fans have been doing Tiger a disservice by hyping him so much. I mean, yeah, he is already one of the greatest golfers ever, but it seems to have gotten to the point where anything less that total domination of the field in every tournament he plays just isn't good enough.

 

Exactly. Tiger played even par yesterday, which was one of the top four or five scores of the day, but all of the announcers kept talking about how disappointing his performance was. Immelman, on the other hand, played +3, and you're insane if you don't think he did a fine job. Don't get me wrong, it was disappointing to see Tiger miss the shots he usually makes (who would have thought it would be his putter that failed him?), but the level of expectation is unreal.

 

at least this weekend brought Tiger one step closer to catching Jack for the record of second place finishes at a major.

 

...the secondary major record, as it were.

Ok, that was bad.

 

QFT

I was listening to ESPN radio last night and all they were talking about was how Tiger lost The Masters instead of Immelman winning it.

 

Amen.